Did I understand Mark Haller right?  The U. S. Attorney for New
Orleans sought Justice Department approval before every prosecution?  Is
that the pattern everywhere?  It seems unlikely in that, prohibition led to
a significant expansion of federal court activity.  In 1921 there were
29,114 prohibition cases while by 1932 there were 65,960 in district
courts.  (Figures derived from Edward Rubin, "A Statistical Study of
Federal Criminal Prosecutions," Law and Contemporary Problems 1 (1934):
494-508, 497.)  And those are only the cases carried to trial.  If the New
Orleans case is the pattern for all jurisdictions, the Justice Department
Archives ought to bulge with correspondence.  But as far as I know, they
don't.
        Also, I had always thought that U. S. attorneys historically had
much autonomy.  Indeed, I've often thought that national prohibition began
the process of significantly narrowing that autonomy.  For the nine years
Assistant Attorney General Mabel Walker Willebrandt directed the federal
prosecution of prohibition cases she sought to make these prosecutions more
efficient.  And her initiatives altered the existing structures and
practices of the Justice Department.  Willebrandt undertook a number of
steps to rationalize federal prosecutions of the prohibition laws.  She
instigated a "flying squad" of special prosecutors for use when federal
district attorneys "proved inept or untrustworthy."  Similarly, in 1924,
under the direction of Attorney General Harlan Fiske Stone, she compiled a
statistical analysis of the prohibition prosecutions of each of the United
States attorneys' offices.  Stone used this information to pressure
attorneys to prosecute more cases or arrange for their resignations.
Though limited by the intricacies of political patronage which dominated
appointments, Willebrandt's actions represented a significant attempt to
bring bureaucratic order to federal prosecutions.  A mark of her success in
bureaucratic terms can be seen in the growth of her staff:  three
assistants in 1921 and over a hundred in 1929.  (from Dorothy Brown's
biography of Willebrandt, 49-80, 50, 54, 72-73)
        Could the correspondence Haller mentioned be a response by the
federal attorneys in New Orleans to meet Washington pressure for more
action?  Or are there other explanations?
 
Richard F. Hamm
Associate Professor of History
        & Public Policy
University at Albany -- SUNY
[log in to unmask]